Responsa for Bava Metzia 187:11
וכל שאפשר לו לקיימו בסופו וכו': אמר רב טבלא אמר רב זו דברי רבי יהודה בן תימא אבל חכמים אומרים אע"פ שאי אפשר לו לקיימו בסופו והתנה עליו מתחילתו תנאו קיים
said on R. Meir's authority: If the condition [is stated] before the act, it is valid; if the reverse, it is not! — But it is all in accordance with R. Meir: yet here it is different, because at the very outset he accepted no liability.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before the bailment came into his hand, he explicitly stated the extent of liability he was prepared to accept; hence, when he receives his charge, his responsibility is already limited. But one cannot be only partly married; therefore, notwithstanding his stipulation, he must hear the full liability involved in marriage. ');"><sup>10</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
A. The document has no value unless witnesses testify that they saw the document, and recognized the signatures of the witnesses, in the hands of its present possessor before the witness in question became a relative of the beneficiary.
SOURCES: Pr. 115, 919, Am. II, 101; Mord. Sanh. 696. This Responsum relates to Pr. 50. In Cr. 31, L. 355, the two parts are printed together.
Teshuvot Maharam
A. Since B has been prevented, by death, from fulfilling his promise, he never became obligated to pay the 20*In some sources (Pr. 50, L. 355) the reading is “marks.” The discrepancy arose because of the similarity of the two Hebrew letters of Khaf and Beth, which stand for 20 and 2 respectively. The Cremona source and the Mord., however, used the word Esrim, 20, specifically. marks to A. Consequently his heirs owe nothing to A.
This question was also sent to R. Meir by his father, R. Baruch, who was one of the judges in this case.
SOURCES: Cr. 31; Pr. 50; Pr. 939; L. 355; Mord. B.M. 247; cf. Jacob Weil, Responsa 105; ibid. 142.